Gothamite Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 That middle t-shirt (which is just fantastic) makes me wish they ditched the "NETS" word mark and just went with a large 'B' and the basketball behind it. Now THAT would have been nice.I wonder if that's even possible for an NBA primary logo. Every single primary logo in the NBA shows the team name and I wonder if that's an NBA rule.Primaries in the other three major leagues don't necessarily have to show any text whatsoever.Almost every logo also lists the city name, which we were led to believe was an NBA mandate. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmen Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Indiana and Washington don't use names.Can't see it being an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxwell70 Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Indiana and Washington don't use names.Can't see it being an issue.But they do! Here are the Primary logos.The NBA makes it so that the team name must be in every logo. Incredibly stupid if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillS Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 @gmen Technically Wizards only recoloured there old logo, so they don't have to put a city name in there. The mandate is for new logos only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graysmith Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Right idea, wrong execution. The font blows and that "S" is so painful to look at. The seams on the basketball look weird too. I definitely like the simplistic route, though.Yep. The basic elements of the logo aren't terrible, but the execution is absolute beginner-level (or rough first draft just to get the idea across). Kind of amazing that no one involved in this project had the guts to stand up and tell the non-designer decision-makers that this is a terribly executed design.I weep for my profession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuordr Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Indiana and Washington don't use names.Can't see it being an issue.But they do! Here are the Primary logos.The NBA makes it so that the team name must be in every logo. Incredibly stupid if you ask me.A sports logo should be the identity of the franchise and if they have to put the city names in the logos, then I believe that the logo must be very weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tBBP Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 There's much more that goes into the brand identity of a sports team than just a logo. That said, I do agree with the semantics of your point; however, if the L does indeed mandate that the team name be included in the designated primary logo, then there's really nothing any designer can do about that. *Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. || dribbble || Behance || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chakfu Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Indiana and Washington don't use names.Can't see it being an issue.But they do! Here are the Primary logos.The NBA makes it so that the team name must be in every logo. Incredibly stupid if you ask me.The logos look incomplete without a name to me, although sometimes it's forced, like with the Houston Rockets, or when text was slapped under chief wahoo.Maybe it's because I'm a fan of the NBA first, but to me, a primary logo should have text; and without text it becomes more appropriate for a secondary logo. I grew up in the '80s, and as far as I can remember, nearly every MLB and NBA primary logo contained the team name. And that includes the Yankees. The only exceptions that come to mind was the utterly horrible Mariners "M's" logo. And a couple of cases where text was forced in awkwardly - Cleveland Indians and Dallas Mavericks. The fact that few NFL teams had a real "primary" logo was disappointing and remains so today. We're left with awkwardness using the Browns helmet, or a disembodied Chargers bolt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrad. Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Since the "S" is so off in the new logo, I switched the font on this revision:tried to keep a similar style to the font, but just use an "S" that is more "curved text" friendly... Red Goat Creations :: Graphic Design Solutions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Noire Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 i love the old spurs unis. and the heat blackouts too. i wonder if the nets will go this route?black on blackI like those spurs unis as well. I think the nets could look good in something like that. Off topic but why is there love for these but so much hate for the heat black on blacks. They are essentially the same idea. Is it the shiny fabric? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tubby34 Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 It's definitely growing on me. I thought it was a joke at first but I have to be honest, I kind of dig the simplicity of it. I don't know of any team that has tried to do a black/white color scheme.I don't like it. It insists upon itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Although the logo does not completely scream "Brooklyn", I like the leaked logo for the Brooklyn Nets mainly for its cleanliness and simplification as opposed to the previous logo incarnations which easily conveyed that the Nets were trying to do too much. Remember, this is the team that brought you these "fine quality" logos:That was a great classic logo www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 I'm sure people have beaten me to this, but was it that hard to get the rights to the "Dodgers B"? On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Noire Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 I'm sure people have beaten me to this, but was it that hard to get the rights to the "Dodgers B"?I would say it couldnt have been easy because the dodgers have no reason to give some other franchise the right to use an icon they still make a profit from. Im sure they make a killing on brooklyn dodgers throwbacks and hats with that B on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 They sure do - no way they're licensing it to another team. Off topic but why is there love for these but so much hate for the heat black on blacks. They are essentially the same idea.Because the Spurs' black-on-black uniform manages to use all the team colors. The Heat's doesn't. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlentz823 Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 I'm sure people have beaten me to this, but was it that hard to get the rights to the "Dodgers B"?I would say it couldnt have been easy because the dodgers have no reason to give some other franchise the right to use an icon they still make a profit from. Im sure they make a killing on brooklyn dodgers throwbacks and hats with that B on itthe common person would just assume its a boston "B" so i think it was a good decision not to do that. but i am not saying the b they chose is the best, because its not, and reads to much like a block 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportsfan0518 Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Indiana and Washington don't use names.Can't see it being an issue.But they do! Here are the Primary logos.The NBA makes it so that the team name must be in every logo. Incredibly stupid if you ask me.The Bulls don't have it...in fact this logo reminds me of Anthony Davis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still MIGHTY Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Except that's not their primary. This is:Every team has the team name in the primary logo, and the only teams without the city/state/location on their primary the Pacers and Wizards. The New Jersey Nets also didn't say New Jersey, and technically the Brooklyn Nets doesnt say Brooklyn, but it does have the B. Heck, hardly any of the defunct NBA teams on the site dont have city/team written on the logo. | ANA | LAA | LAR | LAL | ASU | CSULB | USMNT | USWNT | LAFC | OCSC | MAN UTD | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaytonBlue Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 They took down their site for the changover, but I was able to get around the "hello brooklyn" welcome page. My linkThis is the banner at the top: "I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it could be." -Peter Gibbons RIP Demitra #38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whittier S Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 This was a huge problem I ran into designing wordmarks. N, E and T are so straight-edged and angular, then you have the curviest and most difficult to draw letter tacked onto the end, in addition to the undesirable negative space on either side of the T. It's a bear of a word, and rarely does it look good. 'Brooklyn' is so much better-looking in every way, and much easier to create good looking wordmarks for, but even it has it's own strange rhythm; the first four letters all have rounded shoulders, B, R, O and O, then the last four letters are all straight and angular, K, L, Y and N.It was a massive mistake to keep the Nets name for a Brooklyn team. I'm sure there's a proper linguistic term for it, but with Brooklyn ending in an n and Nets beginning with one you either have to take a full beat between the words ("Brooklyn. Nets.") or it sounds like Brooklynettes, which makes them sound like they're Brooklyn's version of the Rockettes. In fact, the -ette suffix refers to a feminine version of something ("bachelorette") or something that is smaller ("kitchenette"). Probably not what you want your big bad NBA team to sound like.Perhaps I should've taken that naming mistake as a sign that this wasn't going to end well in any way, just like it has.. But best of luck to the Brooklynettes.Oh, and yes.. Nets is a pain in the ass word. It's very hard to make it look good (especially in caps), and you can't really do much with it visually either as far as a logo goes. They should've ditched it, damn it.The word you're looking for to describe, say, the "n" sound in "aloneness" versus the "n" sound in "bonus" is gemination.Linguistics, yet another handy hobby to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.